A Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Single versus Triple Injection Technique for Ultrasound-Guided Infraclavicular Block in Upper Limb Surgeries

Abstract

Introduction

The ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block by triple-point injection method was aimed at blocking the three individual cords in the infraclavicular region. Recently, a single-point injection method which does not require visualization of cords to produce nerve block has been introduced. This study compared the block onset time, performance time, patient’s satisfaction, and complications between the ultrasound guided triple-point injection and single-point injection methods.

Patients and Method

This randomized controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary care hospital. Sixty patients were divided into two groups – Group S: 30 patients received single-point injection method of infraclavicular block. Group T: 30 patients received triple-point injection method of infraclavicular block. Drugs used were 0.5% ropivacaine with 8 mg dexamethasone.

Results

The sensory onset time was significantly longer in Group S (11.13 ±1.83 min) than Group T (6.20 ±1.19min). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups regarding mean motor onset time. The composite sensorimotor onset time was similar between the groups. The mean time to perform the block was significantly lesser in Group S (1.35 ±0.38 min) when compared to group T (3.44 ±0.61min). The patient satisfaction score, conversion to general anesthesia and complications were not significant among the two groups.

Conclusion

We concluded that single-point injection method had a shorter performance time and similar total onset time with less procedural complications compared with triple point injection method.

Keywords:

• ultrasonography
• interventional
• infraclavicular
• anesthesia
• ropivacaine
• dexamethasone
• patient satisfaction

Data Sharing Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study were stored in a computerized database after deidentifying the participants and will be available with the corresponding author. The authors are willing to share the data regarding the outcome measures for research purpose upon request.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.